stay connected while you move with the best wifi experience and two-hour appointment windows. click, call or visit a store today. ♪ emily: i am emily chang in san francisco. and this is "bloomberg technology." in the next hour, president calls out social media again. this time saying the platforms are silencing millions of people. plus, autodesk shift into subscription pays off. we speak to the ceo. tim cook's tenure at apple. how the tech giant has transformed in the seven years since he took over at ceo and who is on the bench.

but first, to our top story. president trump is going after social networks. early friday, trump tweeted, "social media giants are silencing millions of people. can't do this even if it means we must continue to hear fake news like cnn. people have to figure out what is real, what is not without censorship." the tweet did not mention any companies by name, but does follow actions taken by facebook, twitter, alphabet, removing hundreds of accounts linked to alleged propaganda operations. brad joins us now. brad, not necessarily surprising hearing this coming from the president amidst all of the other controversies happening, his top advisers flipping on him, and we are hearing the word impeachment being used by lawmakers, but what is your reaction to this latest, and the use of the word censorship? >> a little bit of exasperation. it really conflates two issues.

one is tech companies trying to facilitate or get out of the way of free speech on their platforms. the tech companies have not been perfect. remember when the trending topics on facebook or negatively oriented against conservative thought, and mark zuckerberg went and met with conservative leaders, that is one topic. the other one is the introduction of foreign influence content on social media. speech that incites hatefulness or action against minority george you know, alex has been -- jones has been suspended. the tech companies are trying to create some basic rules and to enforce them. i think everyone rationally should support that. emily: to be clear, preventing foreign interference in your u.s. elections is not censorship. in fact, it is actually a crime. as you say, there is a spectrum of things happening here. we heard from mark zuckerberg earlier when facebook revealed

that it had shut down hundreds of account tied to iran and hundreds more. well an undisclosed number more tied to russia. take a listen to mark zuckerberg had to say on a call with reporters. >> it is as important that we focus on building relationships with folks in law enforcement and governments in other companies so that we can exchange information and find threats, as it is to build our own capacity dan to do this in isolation. emily: let's talk about issue one, the tech companies have made it clear they cannot do this by themselves. in fact, facebook acted on a tip from the cybersecurity company fireeye which led to them discovering these accounts. we are now hearing a report that representatives from facebook , twitter, google, microsoft are all meeting to coordinate in their election meddling strategy. brad: it's long overdue. right? each of these companies see these attacks and they will get together to talk about what they have seen, what they are doing, and whether they should make

these kinds of meetings routine. the former chief security officer of facebook wrote on the website recently that it might eighth be too late to save the 2018 elections. emily: he said it is too late. brad: it's crazy. the more these tech companies and law enforcement can coordinate, share with they are seeing, share best practices, i think the better off of democracy will be. emily: let's talk about the second point, which is an ongoing issue these companies are in a position of deciding what stays and goes. and it is a very slippery slope. and how does facebook and twitter make those decisions on an ongoing basis without getting this heat from all sides? brad: it is a slippery slope, but some of the examples we have seen are not that ambiguous. emily: do you think alex jones is one? brad: absolutely. the thing that got him suspended from youtube was getting his

subscribers to get their battle rifles to fight the media. acts encourage hatred. the tech companies can do more to keep those off the platforms. the reality is the midterm elections themselves, despite this very long-term issue, they are months away. is it really possible that a secret meeting between the tech companies is going to get things in order before november? brad: it is a good sign. right? they should be meeting and coordinating with law enforcement. we are now over a year from the 2016 elections. we have got really, all the intelligence agencies agreeing the russians manipulated and interfere with our elections. i think this is another sign the

tech companies are taking this seriously. emily: all right, brad, think thank you so much for weighing in. to another story we continue to watch. tesla's spotlight is coming to an end as elon musk propels to a possible rebirth of the private company. we reported that musk hired morgan stanley to assist him in the possibility of going private. morgan stanley is just advising musk, not the board or company. formed to evaluate the take private proposal. the bank suspended coverage of the stock tuesday without an explanation. for more, i want to bring in our reporter who covers tesla. what do we read into this morgan stanley higher? >> goldman sachs was also advising elon musk, so now he has the two top investment banks in his corner as he puts forward an actual proposal to the board, which no one has seen yet. there is a lot of factions now. there is musk himself, who is

the ceo, chairman, and largest shareholder. there is tesla as the company, the board of directors, and the special committee of the board assembled to evaluate any real proposal from musk when he puts one forward. so what is happening now is you have pr firms, lawyers, banks, all lining up to get a piece of the action. no matter which way this goes, there is money to be made on all sides. emily: absolutely. it seems to be made no matter what happens. what are the actual next steps we should expect to see in this very unexpected scenario? dana: we've not seen any real proposal from elon musk about his go private plan and who the funders are. he tweeted about it, wrote a blog post, but that is different from perhaps a detailed financial plan that tesla would then maybe issue. he has to put forward a plan. broughty i think he has in bankers to help him write one, but that would be the next obvious step, a real plan. they're probably talking to banks, but there is nothing to

evaluate yet. there is no real proposal yet. that is what everyone is waiting for. in the interim, there is not a lot of hard news right now, just speculation. the next up is a real proposal from musk. emily: so how long could we expect this process to take the matter what the endpoint is? dana: he can do this on whatever timeline he sees fit. right? at one point, there was a rumor that they want to get this done quickly before they have to report third-quarter earnings reports, but what is the rush? the stock is remarkably resilient in terms of share price. some investors do not want them him to go private. there is a lot of question about how it will happen, but i imagine it could go slowly. there is not like a timeline on it. this is basically his company and he can do whatever he wants. emily: now talk to us a little it about what we know about the sec inquiries.

we had a former attorney on from them that said it is clear from her perspective there are multiple investigations going on into tesla given how quickly the sec has moved. that is now an outside observer's perspective, but what do we knew about the progress and enforcement the sec could take? dana: my understanding is that the sec, when they investigate a company come they often have simultaneous inquiries going on about more than one thing. so as our reporters figured out, the sec was already looking at tesla and company statements, then the tweet happened and that spurred them to look closely. i don't know whether those two things have converged or are still on separate tracks. apparently subpoenas have been issued. we don't know which executives have been interviewed, but there were supposed to be interviews this week. tesla is a big target for an agency like the sec. and so it is kind of like, you know, if you come at the king, you best not miss.

i imagine they are still investigating. asust don't know the scope they look at things. emily: most analysts say there is a zero chance of this going private, of happening. have you talked to anyone else who says yes, this is a very realistic option. here is how? dana: it's hard to say. i guess i would just recall that when musk proposed to buy solarcity, everyone thought that was bananas and would never happen. it ultimately passed with 85% of shareholders saying yes. it's a question of their ir team and what big investors does he have in his pocket. if you can flip big shareholders, and convince some of his personal friends to go along with him, there might be a way to do it. spacex seems to be the template of what he would like to do. i just think the question is

also, what are the limits of the big shareholders in terms of their ability to actually go private. but he is a very determined guy, and now that he has made his intentions public, there will be huge egg on his face if he cannot pull it off. he has lined them up to help them figure this out and lined up the investors to make this happen. emily: have you spoke to any current tesla employees about how they feel about this? are they upset they could lose their flexibility around liquidity? dana: i think people want to know what it means in terms of their stock options. you have options. vest in certain tranches. how would that change? spacex is a popular program where employees do have options that trade on the secondary market. they are able to sell them during different liquidity events. so i don't think people are in a panic about it. i just think the whole go private timeline is in the air

and people want to know what it will mean for them. for tesla employees, stock compensation is a big part of their overall package. and the bay area is a really expensive place to live, so they want to know what will happen with that. emily: indeed it is. thank you as always and for your continued reporting on this developing story. coming up autodesk is showing , progress converting customers to subscribers. we will speak to the company ceo about the company's earning report, next. and if you like bloomberg news, check us out on the radio, listen on the bloomberg radio app, on bloomberg.com, and, on in the u.s. on sirius xm. this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: autodesk climbed to a record high friday after the

s second quarter earnings report and forecast gave analysts at rbc capital market and oppenheimer confidence for the stock, citing the transition and subscriber growth. the ceo of autodesk joins me now in the studio. so why do you think investors are so excited? andrew: there are a couple of things people are excited about. growth is up 28%. it was the kind of thing they were expecting to see moving in into this side of the transition. in the front end of a transition, everything was going this way. now they are going this way. people are seeing the result they expect to see and it gives us room to talk about the long-term and not just the mood move to subscription. emily: where is that long-term growth? andrew: the exciting thing for the new age of automation for the company is we are moving from being a design software company to a design automation

provider. we are getting much more into construction processes or manufacturing processes or others. that is the exciting long-term opportunity for the company. it is fueled by the transition, but also fueled by the cloud-based age of machine learning and automation we are wondering into now. it is very exciting. emily: speaking of, we had one of your employees on the show to talk about ava, the female ai you have been working on , planning to the integrated into more of your software. this ai can analyze facial expressions and it can detect emotions. what is the progress? andrew: that is a customer facing application helping customers do things with our products. it's not actually built into the products. it is how we interact with our customers. and frankly, the way way it is designed for the processes we use it for, it is increasing customer satisfaction. we have all had interaction with chatbots.

sometimes you want to find the button that gets you off of the chatbots, and you just want the person thing. this particular one, we targeted it so tightly to a problem customers were having and would call us about, that satisfaction scores go up. that piece is working, but that is the tip of the iceberg. emily: what you think about the backlash to these ai's and that people want true human connection and they are still going to physical stores in order to get that connection even though e-commerce is booming and will continue to grow? andrew: we are automation optimists. we are actually machine learning optimists about what the future is going. we believe the ai and machine algorithms that you are seeing, they are best when they facilitate collaboration between human beings. when we look at what were trying to do with our software, we are trying to move away from having software talk to you, and more facilitate interdisciplinary connections between architects and construction managers, and architects and building

planners, and architects and owners. this is where we believe the real power is. because, yes, people want the human connection, and they also want to know their role as human beings. it is a really important part of the process. emily: you're not worried about the apocalyptic future elon musk warned about? andrew: i have a great deal of respect for elon, but i disagree with him on the apocalyptic future. i think he has read too much dystopian science-fiction. i read the same science-fiction. we cai salting a capacity problem. we work with people that build buildings, products, roads. do we think we can do enough of that right now? do you think we are effective and efficient at that? no. people need to do it a lot more with a lot less negative impact on the world. we think ai will help us do that, not destroy jobs. it will create a whole new class of climate and jobs. emily: what about m&a?

how much will that be part of your strategy going forward? andrew: we have always been an acquisitive company, and we are trying to be number one in the construction space and move deeply into the digital manufacturing space, we will be looking at all options as we move forward. it is who we are. emily: what areas? andrew: construction is for first and foremost. we bought a company called assemble which helps improve the pre-construction part of our portfolio. emily: we have been talking about election meddling, increasing cyber security concerns as everything goes to the cloud and hacks become more sophisticated. what are you doing to safeguard yourself and your clients against that? andrew: security and they security of the data and the preservation of the data, and frankly privacy, is a big deal for us. the whole discussion around privacy, around facebook, this is something i have been passionate about for five years. i think silicon valley is at its best when it treats its

end-users as its customers, not it's products. and as we start moving away from this "you are my product and i can do something with you and sell you to something" area, we are going to get past that. because uniform privacy laws for all of us are going to level the market and actually accelerate innovation, not hold it back. emily: facebook's business model is fundamentally based on selling our information. >> it is unfortunate for them, isn't it? emily: that's not going to change. andrew: no. one of the things we need to look at, and this is a hot button for me, if we start looking at uniformed privacy laws, we will start leveling the playing field about which business model is successful. look at apple. what has apple done? they basically sell small micro subscriptions for everything. i happily give my money for every little micro -- i have lost track how many micro

subscriptions i have with apple, because i like their environment where they treat me as a customer and do not sell me. i think what europe has done is partly right. there is a little anti-american tech companies in there, but we should do that everywhere. emily: it's hard to believe people will be paying for facebook, but facebook is exploring it. they key so much for stopping by, andrew anagnost. fintec.re ofm china has become the epicenter of technology. more on that's next. this is bloomberg. ♪

♪ emily: in china, you can pay for almost anything with a phone, and almost everyone does. the country made almost $9 trillion worth of transactions on mobile devices in 2016. closer look at a its cashless society.

>> sophia won't leave the house without very important one accessory. her smartphone. sophia takes a taxi to the office, orders breakfast, and lunch. after work, she jumps on the train and calls in her dinner home from the station. she pays for tall using her smartphone. mobile payments in china surged 382% in 2016 compared to 2015. transactions were worth almost $9 trillion. and most of these transactions were made using apps and payment platforms owned or backed by china's two tech giants, alibaba and tencent. every month more than a billion

and wechat payay for simple transactions like buying food and more complex deals like taking out a personal loan. financial technology is eating into the business from traditional state-owned banks. >> the growth of mobile payment in china reflect the underdevelopment of the traditional financial element of china. because there are so many people or no bankr banked services. online are making their banking apps more user-friendly and dropping some fees. >> they are picking up fast because there is almost no barrier in terms of technology. >> but the chinese central bank is also complaining a cashless society threatens deposits and fees. in july, china urged consumers and businesses not to refuse cash. in early august, it fined alipay hundreds of thousands of dollars

for breaching rules. but alipay is one step ahead. it launched a chain of stores where, not surprisingly, mobile payment is encouraged and cash is not. >> [speaking a foreign language] >> while china is no doubt the number one cashless market in the world, there are still places in the country where cash is king, like traditional farmers markets. ♪ emily: coming up, protecting the midterms. one former facebook exec says it is too late to save 2018. is he right?

we would discuss, next. this is bloomberg. ♪

♪ emily: this is "bloomberg technology." i am emily chang in san francisco. now to our continuing look at securing the upcoming midterm elections. facebook organized a secret tech to devise a strategy at ahead of the november float -- vote. that is according to email by buzzfeed. they plan to discuss what to do andrevent misinformation meddling leading up to the midterms. past wednesday, facebook's former head of security sounded the alarm, saying it is already to save the 2018 election. writing on a blog, he said "in

some ways the u.s. broadcast to the world that he is not taking issue seriously and that any perpetrators of information warfare against the west will at most get a slap on the wrist. this has happened, there is still a chance to defend american democracy in 2020." i want to get straight to new york with our guest. he recently co-authored a report on how to protect the vote. do you think it is too late for 2018? >> i definitely don't think it is too late. there is a lot we can do ahead ahead of this november to protect our elections. it is important we are talking about this concept of foreign interference in our elections to distinguish between three related, but really separate, issues. one is disinformation and information warfare on social media. information warfare on social media. that is a lot of focus is on i'm

sure between facebook and google and these other groups. againsts cyberattacks campaigns and think tanks. we have seen that recently in the news. then there are attacks on our election infrastructure, voting machines, electrical booths. there is a lot we could be doing in the next 75 days before the election to make sure we can protect the vote. emily: you mentioned registration systems, poll booths, voting machines. there are failures and all of these in every election but in a cyberattack there would be more widespread, so we need a contingency plan. what is that contingency plan? >> you are right. no election is perfect and there are always flaws. the key is to make sure every jurisdiction is prepared this time. election officials do have a lot of experience with contingency planning. but i will give you an example.

you show up to the polls, you in.body is checking in 33 states, it is an electronic poll book. that is a tablet or a computer. now that computer might not be working. that tablet might not be working when you show up. that could be a failure or part of a cyber attack. the key is what do officials do then to make sure you can vote. we seen hours long lines in the past. what we want to make sure is paper backup. it sounds simple, but in 10 states, they do not have the paper backup right now. so that they can check you in. similarly on the voting machine, is it working, are there problems with it? we what to make sure there are emergency paper ballots to fill out in case they have to take time to fix those machines or to get replacement machines. that is really the key. they: ok, but you have former security head at facebook saying russia has effectively

given every other country of a playbook on how to do this. iran is doing it as well. who is to say that china and north korea are not already doing this as well? if best practices were actually in place in november, with that would that be enough? vote, making the sure people can vote, and that at the end of the day we can count results accurately, i do think being prepared is what is critical right now. we only have 75 days left. so i think the point that alex was making in that piece is that big structural changes are probably not going to happen in the next 75 days. but if what we are concerned about is making sure that even if there is a breach everyone can still vote and that afterwards we are able to count those votes accurately. that is certainly possible, and that is really what we should be

focused on. that is what a election officials are focused on in the next 75 days. i think we all have a part to play in that. emily: we learned that facebook , twitter, google, microsoft, snap are having a secret meeting reportedly to coordinate on their strategies to combat election meddling, to talk about what they are doing. what can they do to be stronger together? work, it hase i called for better, uniform industry standards around this, and in particular around paid political ads. foreign powers should not be purchasing political ads. that is illegal. so if we are moving closer to industrywide standards in this space, that is a good thing. one of the things that facebook in particular was criticized for was being fairly slow and

coppingvestigating and to what they were finding. having rapid investigations when they are discovering stuff and being transparent about what they are finding and what they are doing i think it would be great to see. it would be great to see across these platforms. if they can agree to that, that would be wonderful. emily: what do you think congress and the states should be doing? >> there is a bill in congress, the secure elections act. particularly around election infrastructure and securing that infrastructure will go a long way towards increasing cybersecurity for that election infrastructure. has bipartisan support. i would like to see that bill move. one senator and senator mccain have something called the honest ads act. it would start to regulate paid ads on the internet the same way we do on broadcast tv and print.

that is another really important step. there are definitely actions that congress can take. it should not be breaking down along partisan lines where we can protect ourselves from foreign meddling in our elections. emily: let's move ahead to 2020. what are some longer-term things that the private and public sector can and should be doing to make sure we are ready by 2020? of the bigll, one things i am focused on is starting to invest in securing election infrastructure. so we have got 13 states still that use paperless voting systems. virtually everybody agrees that we should have some kind of paper backup. secretary nielsen of the department of homeland security said yesterday that we should have auditable systems in every single jurisdiction. that costs money. so investing to make sure we

replace those systems, that we have paper backups, that we are auditing the paper backups. that we are taking the paper that 80% of the country is voting on and using it to check the software. at the end of the day what we totals tellingre us who won and lost elections. those are straightforward simple things that we can get done before 2020. and just starting to think that there is a shared federal state and local responsibility for funding the security of our elections. this is a national security issue. emily: all right. we will be talking about what is happening over the next 75 days. thank you so much for your recommendations and input. sticking with election news, lyft wants to make sure people have rides. it is working to offer free and discounted rides to polling places.

it is offering half off trips to get people out to vote. coming up, is tech responsible for slow wage growth? head to jackson hole to find out. we will look at who is on apple's bench, coming up. this is bloomberg. ♪

♪

this week in jackson hole, wyoming, the annual symposium is underway. we sat down with the economics professor at the university of chicago to measure the tech affect. >> markets are changing in a pretty systematic way. we see more and more concentration of activity within industries with just a few firms. there is a lot of discussion about what that means about market power, about changing the technology and how industries are going to evolve from here forward. what that means for inflation and things like that. >> is a good or bad that we are seeing this kind of concentration? >> it could be either. concentration can be market related to an increase in market power, monopoly power, which can depress investment, harm consumers, raise prices. but on the other hand, changes in technology that make it

easier for companies to obtain attain scale or things that affect markets to make things easier for customers to find a preferred seller, we would think of those things as beneficial evolutions in the industry and market. >> obviously the fed wants to learn more. do regulators understand this new world? >> i think they understand the two stories, that it could go either way. we are all a little in the dark about what it actually is. some people have strong feelings one way or the other. i think the evidence at this point is still pretty mixed and the jury is out, but i think regulators realize that by and large. >> bill gates wrote the software where people don't get what is going on, because the marginal cost of production after your first unit is zero. >> that is an example of technological advancement that would make it easier for

companies to get really large. once you develop the software, you can make as many copies as you want at no additional cost. you might not be surprised in a market like that that one company can take over a substantial share of the market. but that is not necessarily a bad thing. it can be a bad thing if they position toored keep out new entrance, new products. that is where the antitrust angle becomes important. >> do we see that happening? are consumers better off or worse off at this point? people point to this concentration is one reason why we don't see wages rising? >> that is definitely something being discussed. i think the evidence is kind of mixed on that. it could be either way. i think time will tell. and we need to look a little more closely at the issue , especially with wages. that has been on a lot of people's minds lately. >> you said we lived in an age

of paradox. we have rapid advances in artificial intelligence and machine learning, and yet issured productivity growth half of what it used to be. can we understand what is going on? >> the best popular explanation for that is we are in a time where new technologies are coming along. companies are trying to figure out how to use it, but that .akes investment, retraining all of that takes up resources so you will have slow productivity growth when you are allocating resources to set up the new technology, but not yet seen the benefit of that new technology. we have been exploring this story in a recent study, and we think the best explanation for this juxtaposition of slow productivity growth but optimism

about new technology. >> eric was here a couple of years ago and said the same that you said, so does that happen? >> if you look in history at similar introductions of big technology, it can take a decade or more. if you look at the introduction intoe electric motor manufacturing's, or early computers, 15 or 20 years in some cases to get to the point where you actually saw the productivity benefits of those new technologies showing up in the productivity. >> you have got slow productivity and low wages. which is the cause and which is the effect? >> that is another good question that can go either way. certainly there is something to productivity,low slow wage growth prayer. there is some evidence but it is not quite clear. >> so to bring it back to the

topic of the conference here, do we see a change? do we see with growing market power of some companies, do we see the incentive for them to invest if they have the power to control markets anyway? >> one of the things i think that people will be talking about here is what is the relationship between changes in market structure and investment? how is that related to technology? is it about market power? is it a different kind of investment that we are not good measuring? how is that related to wages? that will be a big topic of discussion this weekend. >> speaking with michael mckee from jackson hole. google taking another step on the road to getting back into china. and this time it involves the parent company alphabet setting up a waymo subsidiary there.

wills set up a unit that focus on testing and logistics. the move comes after google confirmed it is working with the chinese government to create a search engine for use in china. google left china in 2010 over censorship concerns. coming up, it takes a village to run apple, but beyond the ceo tim cook, who are the other faces of the tech giant that we may not know as well. we will discuss next. this weekend on bloomberg television's, we will bring you our best interviews from the week, including our interview with brad smith after it said it found and seized bogus websites created by russian hackers. tune in this saturday for the best of bloomberg technology. this is bloomberg. ♪

♪ cook'swell, it is tim seventh anniversary at apple but behind the face of the company

over 100 executives help run outside the limelight. cook says passing through baton is one of his most crucial responsibilities. we looked at 15 lesser-known but highly influential executives. let's start with tim cook. we know he has a pay package vests fully in 2021. how long do we expect him to stay? >> he is 57 years old. it seems that apple is the only thing he cares about. he has mentioned that sometimes, that some people say apple is his entire life. he runs the ship even though it is not a one-man shop. i could see him being there for the next 10 years plus. he is only 57 years old. public company ceos typically retire around the age of 70. some go longer, some go shorter. apple has always been unique in that respect. it is really up in the air. emily: so who are the other faces of apple that we need to know? who could potentially be next in line? >> that is a good question.

so to step back, there are three organizational rows. there is tim cook on top along with the board of directors, which he reports to. then he has a group of 10 senior vice presidents. that includes the general counsel, the head of retail, but the two people to focus on are shiller,shelf are phil head of marketing, who was important with steve jobs in returning apple to the company it is today as well as the chief operating officer. if anything were to happen, it would likely go to one of those two. below that row are dozens of vice presidents who report to those people. coo,: jeff williams, the just as tim cook was coo. talk to us about the female executives on the bench. question. a good the head of retail, she was the ceo of burberry before joining

apple. she has a very high profile. some people consider her a successor to tim cook. there is kate adams, who is their new general counsel. handling all legal duties. we have seen the situation with samsung in recent months. she has been at the forefront at that. another runs china operations for apple. susan prescott on the services side. jennifer bailey runs apple pay. so lots of very important women at apple at the top. and i have this chart in my library showing the apple market cap crossing got $1 trillion mark, which is a huge milestone and huge accomplishment for tim cook. he has said passing the baton is important, and they talk about succession. what do we know about those discussions, assuming that even

if it is not going to happen imminently that they do discuss what will happen years from now? >> right, we have a pretty good idea they have a plan what would happen tomorrow if tim cook stepped off the wrong curb. i'm sure they have a 5, 10, 15 year plan. this is the biggest company in the world. there are no excuses for them not to have a succession plan. they plan everything in such fine detail from the piece of paper they put in the stores to indicate prices to what goes in their devices, so it's not too hard to think they think the same way for succession planning. emily: a great piece from you. if you're interested in some of ofse lesser-known faces apple. thank you for stopping by. that does it for this edition of bloomberg technology. it is all for now. i'm emily chang in san francisco. have a wonderful weekend. we'll be back on monday.

♪

>> the is a pretty program is not reflect the opinions of bloomberg lp. announcer: this program is a paid presentation for omega xl and is brought to you by great healthworks. ♪ larry: welcome. i am larry king. and i'm here to report on a significant health-related investigation that has been taking place for the past couple of years. the information i will provide you during the course of this show is relevant to everyone's health and